4 ms·
I would consider it extremely obscure overall. A large majority of programmers would not be aware of its existence. At the same time there are clearly much less
by recursivecaveat 3mo ago
I would consider it extremely obscure overall. A large majority of programmers would not be aware of its existence. At the same time there are clearly much less popular languages with articles so it is kindof weird to push to delete. (eg: random scheme implementation w/ no releases in 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SISC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SISC) I would say that wikipedia broadly favors programming languages as far as notability. Like most nerd/geek things their footprint skews toward the internet, and people who enjoy geek stuff are more likely to be wikipedia admins than the general population.
- nvme0n1p1 3mo agoSISC is there because it's not notable, so the busybodies haven't even noticed the page exists. Odin, however, is notable, and that put it on their radar as a target for attacking its notability.
- stymaar 3mo agoAnd here's the persecution LARPing the article talks about.
- HappyPanacea 3mo agoSo why is that article not deleted yet?
- lambdaone 3mo agoI see it's been nominated for deletion today. Looking at it, it's been marked for attention for two years, so it's not as if people haven't had time to do anything about it.
- woodruffw 3mo agoThis is an argument for deleting those non-notable articles as well, not retaining other non-notable articles.
- chris_wot 3mo agoNot more obscure than Brainfuck.
- traes 3mo agoWhat? Brainfuck is the single least obscure esoteric programming language. It's the most famous example of a simple Turing complete language and its provocative name gets it a fair amount of media coverage outside its niche.
- chris_wot 3mo agoCould you use it in production?
- traes 3mo agoFrom Cambridge dictionary: obscure (adjective) not known to many people: - an obscure island in the Pacific - an obscure 12th-century mystic Why does its use in production matter? Perhaps the syntax itself is obscure, but we're not discussing syntax but general awareness. Anyway, the most common "real" use of brainfuck is to prove Turing completeness of other things by finding a way to compile them into brainfuck.
- chris_wot 3mo agoIf you quote the dictionary to win an argument, quote it in full. There are two definitions of obscure in the Cambridge dictionary. The other is: obscure (adjective) not clear and difficult to understand or see: - Official policy has changed, for reasons that remain obscure. - His answers were obscure and confusing. - "the syntax itself is obscure"
- halperter 3mo agoPretty sure caveat intended for the former definition.
- 3mo ago
- torginus 3mo agoUnfortunately what makes a programming language famous is usually not the thing that makes it useful. For example, Go got famous because of how much they pushed channels and launching thousands of green threads per app as the next big thing. Over time, people kind of soured on these ideas, but Go was a great, simple language with good DX that built static executables. As a contrast, languages like Kotlin or Swift also brought huge DX improvements to their respective audiences, but didn't really have any standout (novel or divisive) features that made people talk about them. Odin's like that - it's basically C (or more accurately Pascal) with better generics and some gamedev related features, so it's not as painful to write as plain C.